NationStates Jolt Archive

OK, no flames please. Also, don't assume you know anything about my beliefs based on the question, to do so shows a lack of understanding that someone could just be curious (as I am). Finally, no "this is a dumbass question" replies - if you think that way, then just don't post, all I want are answers to the question, nothing more or less.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.

I wouldn't care, rather assuming that there was an explicable reason for this...occurance.

I wouldn't become a Christian, nor follow any of Jesus' teachings.

I am an agnostic, although I can only speak for myself. Personally, I do believe that Jesus existed and was a great teacher. If there was indisputable proof that he rose from the dead, I would still be agnostic. Whether Jesus rose from the dead or not does not change my beliefs about him or god. O, and next time don't use the term "non-christian." This is a stupid term and just shows your ignorance.

. . . next time don't use the term "non-christian." This is a stupid term and just shows your ignorance.

How so? Are you saying there are people out there who are not christian who believe in the death and resurrection? If so, who? I've never heard of them. Christians believe in this, I've never heard of a non christian who did.

Also, note, I am constrained by title lengths. I couldn't title the thread:

" A Hypothetical for Aetheists/Agnostics/Buddists/Pagans/Wiccans/Olympians/Norsemen/Taoists/Islamics/Native Americans/Quezecotalists/Ra Worshippers/Jews, etc."

So I used a generic term to describe everyone who doesn't believe in the Christian death and resurrection story.

as a jew, i do find this question interesting. it would not make me convert to christianity, but i would have to think about why it happend and possibly think of jesus as a prophet. most of his teachings were, after all, exactly ours. (even if people misinterpret them)

How so? Are you saying there are people out there who are not christian who believe in the death and resurrection? If so, who? I've never heard of them. Christians believe in this, I've never heard of a non christian who did.
i agree, if he left out the non-christian bit, i wouldn't have posted

No.

I wouldn't care, rather assuming that there was an explicable reason for this...occurance.

I wouldn't become a Christian, nor follow any of Jesus' teachings.

So true, so true :fluffle:

No.

No what? You wouldn't become a christian? OK, no one else who has posted would either (and I don't even care if you would or wouldn't, that is not the question. The question is what would you do?)

OK, no flames please. Also, don't assume you know anything about my beliefs based on the question, to do so shows a lack of understanding that someone could just be curious (as I am). Finally, no "this is a dumbass question" replies - if you think that way, then just don't post, all I want are answers to the question, nothing more or less.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.

Well I'd be pretty damn surprised. It wouldn't change much in my life except for online arguments about religion though :) After all, my morals and the way I live are based on what I feel is right and good, not whether some dude managed to do the impossible 2000 years ago. Finding out that Christ really rose from the dead would mean a bit of a shakeup for my understanding of science, but it's not gonna make me start pretending to embrace christianity just in case.

The question is what would you do?
:confused:
Ahem, watch the News, see "Jesus really did rise again" and be suprised.
Then come to the conclusion that this doesn't prove that god exists, nor that Jesus was any more relevant to me.
Then continue to eat my TV-Dinner.

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

I would have to reconsider my notions of life and death to incorporate the existence of zombies.

As stupid as it sounds, I think I'd need to know how long he was dead for before the resurrection. Sometimes people die and just come back to life minutes later for seemingly no reason. I'm not very good with my biblical history, so you'll have to tell me. Also, I assume that the evidence in question would prove that he actually died (and that he wasn't just in a coma or something). If you can prove that he was dead for a day or days before the resurrection, I'd call that a full-blown miracle. As an agnostic, I'd seriously reconsider my stance on religion. I wouldn't necessarily become a Christian, but I'd probably start carefully reading Jesus' teachings.

As stupid as it sounds, I think I'd need to know how long he was dead for before the resurrection. Sometimes people die and just come back to life minutes later for seemingly no reason. I'm not very good with my biblical history, so you'll have to tell me. Also, I assume that the evidence in question would prove that he actually died (and that he wasn't just in a coma or something). If you can prove that he was dead for a day or days before the resurrection, I'd call that a full-blown miracle. As an agnostic, I'd seriously reconsider my stance on religion. I wouldn't necessarily become a Christian, but I'd probably start carefully reading Jesus' teachings.

3 days.

I am an agnostic, although I can only speak for myself. Personally, I do believe that Jesus existed and was a great teacher. If there was indisputable proof that he rose from the dead, I would still be agnostic. Whether Jesus rose from the dead or not does not change my beliefs about him or god.

Replace "Agnostic" with "Atheist" and you have my viewpoint.

I would be amazed physical evidence lasted 2000 years for us to retrieve.

I would be amazed physical evidence lasted 2000 years for us to retrieve.
there are 27 churches that claim to have his foreskin despite the fact that part of the ceremony of the bris is to bury it

I would think (as I do now), "Jesus had some nice teachings. Too bad his various 'followers' have corrupted them."

I would think (as I do now), "Jesus had some nice teachings. Too bad his various 'followers' have corrupted them."
i like this person, he seems to think the way i do, that's why i remain a jew, because by what i've seen, jesus promoted judaism.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.
Tough question. It would at the very least make me doubt my lack of belief. Right now, I don't ever wonder if there's some higher power (or whatever), but in your scenario, I assume I'd start speculating about it.

I might be wrong, but I have a feeling you'd much rather know how an atheist would react to proof of God (the Christian one). In my case, I'd start waging war on it, because in all honesty, I simply cannot percieve the Christian God to be anything other than pure evil. No offence intended.

I'd be mildly surprised but eventually decide that this was too long ago for me to really care. Besides, this would not suddenly lead me to believe that the Christian teachings were any more convincing than they are now.

I would be rather confused, and after some time think that was a pretty neat occurance.
I would then set about trying to do the same thing myself, and far too late realise I missed some important ingrediant just before dying a horrible messy and painfull death.


:eek: :mp5:

I'd probably say, "Wow, that's neat. Bastard pulled a David Blaine, or something, coming back to life."

But I'd still of course be Agnostic, just because jesus would be proven to exist, wouldn't change the fact that I don't agree with most of the teachings of Christianity.

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?
It wouldn't change much, I suppose. My main concern is not becoming someone that looks down on other people for having a different religion.

I'd dedicate my life to figuring out how his magic worked and what it represented. (Hey if resurrection is possible, then literal immortality might be too).

All it would prove is that it is possible to resurrect the dead; it could mean that Jesus was special, it could mean that whoever resurrected him was special; it could even mean he was some kind of divine being...

However, I would need confirmation, revelation and repetition to accept Christianity myself.

Till I got hard proof, I'd only accept that the material world is more supernatural then I at first thought.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?


Well......

There is some evidence that a man who has become known as JC may have existed. He may certainly have been crucified and it is even possible that three days later he was seen walking around - tghough there is a medical explination for that.

So, once step at a time.

Irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived = no difference.

Irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth was crucified = no difference.

Irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth rose from the dead? Well first you have to prove that modern science would have actually declared him dead - and without time travel that would be impossible. Therefore your hypothetical question fail because it askes the impossible.

As stupid as it sounds, I think I'd need to know how long he was dead for before the resurrection. Sometimes people die and just come back to life minutes later for seemingly no reason. I'm not very good with my biblical history, so you'll have to tell me. Also, I assume that the evidence in question would prove that he actually died (and that he wasn't just in a coma or something). If you can prove that he was dead for a day or days before the resurrection, I'd call that a full-blown miracle. As an agnostic, I'd seriously reconsider my stance on religion. I wouldn't necessarily become a Christian, but I'd probably start carefully reading Jesus' teachings.

He is said to have died at 3pm on the Friday. Soon after he was removed from the cross and placed in a cave tomb. to comply with Jewish law he would have had to be there long enough before sunset to allow his followers to return home before sunset. So, lets say he was intered before 6pm.

It was discovered he was not in the cave early on the Sunday morning. So, the best guess (if the story is true) is that he came round on the Friday evening and left the cave some time in the following 30 to 36 hours.

He is said to have died at 3pm on the Friday. Soon after he was removed from the cross and placed in a cave tomb. to comply with Jewish law he would have had to be there long enough before sunset to allow his followers to return home before sunset. So, lets say he was intered before 6pm.

It was discovered he was not in the cave early on the Sunday morning. So, the best guess (if the story is true) is that he came round on the Friday evening and left the cave some time in the following 30 to 36 hours.

And then a Boulder was set outside the entrance of his tomb, and guards outside the boulder.

OK, no flames please. Also, don't assume you know anything about my beliefs based on the question, to do so shows a lack of understanding that someone could just be curious (as I am). Finally, no "this is a dumbass question" replies - if you think that way, then just don't post, all I want are answers to the question, nothing more or less.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.

I am an atheist.
I do not believe that it will ever be proven, but if were to be proven I would still be an atheist.

And then a Boulder was set outside the entrance of his tomb, and guards outside the boulder.
And that chick (forgot the name) was s'posed to bathe his corpse, so she bribed the guards & ran off with the stiff...

There's no point in debating what actually happened. Noone knows.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=27&version=31

The bible is the only resource on this issue.

It wouldn't alter my beliefs, as an agnostic. A death/resurrection is not necessarily a miracle...it could just be a scientific anomaly.

Being an agnostic, I simply accept the fact that there is no proof in the existence of a higher power, and no proof against such a power. I am more than willing to accept the existence of Jesus, and I do, in fact, fully embrace his teachings. I just wish actual Christians did, as well. Imagine if all the world's Christians turned the other cheek, loved their enemies, tended the sick and poor, prayed silently in their hearts, renounced the lifestyle of greed and acquisition...not that any of these teachings originated with Jesus. Buddha taught the same things, roughly 500 years earlier. And Confucious, I think a hundred years before that.

Of course, it would be nice if the followers of most major religions actually followed the tenets of their faiths, rather than clinging to whatever obscure quote supports the selfish action they are enjoying at that particular moment. Religious texts...bah.

But returning to your question...even if you accept the existence of Jesus, it does not necessarily follow that he is the son of an almighty God. And even given a resurrection from death, it does not necessarily follow that this is a divine act.

Some people would say: Well, you wouldn't accept the existence of God if he came down from the sky and stood in front of you. To this I respond: Do you believe every person that says he/she is a god? Or do you just lock them up and sedate them? Personally, I prefer to avoid hypocrisy, when possible.

Follow the teachings of Christ, the actual teachings of Christ, and I think you'll do just fine. Follow the teachings of Leviticus, maybe not so much...and if there is a God, may he have mercy on those who follow the teachings of Pat Robertson...yeesh...

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=27&version=31

The bible is the only resource on this issue.
Prove it is. If you give me a couple of days (I have a life outside NS), I can easily write something both less suspect, less contradicting, and more coherrent.

You also forget to mention the apocryphica (or whatever the hell it's called).

My life would be made worse. Instead of certain Christians pointing to a book with no basis in scientific fact and using it as an excuse to enact Theocratic laws, they'd point to a book with one basis in scientific fact and use it as an excuse to enact Theocratic laws. That one fact in their favor would sway a few people to their side, I'm sure.

My own personal belief system (which is decidedly "non-christian") would be unaffected.

On the other hand, I would probably be like...

"Go Jesus! Don't take no shit from those punk-ass Romans!"

:p

OK, no flames please. Also, don't assume you know anything about my beliefs based on the question, to do so shows a lack of understanding that someone could just be curious (as I am). Finally, no "this is a dumbass question" replies - if you think that way, then just don't post, all I want are answers to the question, nothing more or less.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.


Is this some kind of joke?

If you don't want stupid answers don't post stupid questions.

You might not think your post betrays anything about your personal beliefs but in reality it reveals much

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?.



Your question isnt fair.

You dont want to argue about what form the "proof" would take, but thats the most important part.

You say that for the sake of arguement, were are supposed to automatically believe that Jesus Christ was crucified, and rose form the dead.
But thats a loaded question.
Youre asking a question that only has the answer you want to hear.

Obviously, most people, if suddenly were convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt, would change thier minds about Christianity.

The "proof" is the important part, becuase your question purposely skips over the issue of what could possibly show irrefutable proof of such an impossible event as anyone coming back from the dead.
One that couldnt be questioned as being faslified.

Its not a fair question.

A better question might be:

"What would it take to change my mind?"

The answer to that is simple.

A public appearance.

Prove it is. If you give me a couple of days (I have a life outside NS), I can easily write something both less suspect, less contradicting, and more coherrent.

You also forget to mention the apocryphica (or whatever the hell it's called).

Well, the only available source used round the world.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=27&version=31

The bible is the only resource on this issue.

Well if you want to use a collection of fairy stories as a resource.....

This question is fairly idiotic.

Let me ask you this, if Zeus came down from the heavens right now in his firey chariot and smote you with a bolt of lighting, what would you think?

This question is fairly idiotic.

Let me ask you this, if Zeus came down from the heavens right now in his firey chariot and smote you with a bolt of lighting, what would you think?


I would think he was a total bastard.

I have to say that I agree with BackwoodsSquatches.
If it was proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus had died and risen from the dead three days later then my view of Christianity would be radically changed, I don't think I would know what to think.

On the other hand. Proving to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus died and came back to life three days later is the hard part. If you can prove that to me you have already radically changed my thoughts on Christianity.

I don't know what I would think. I guess that I would assume that it was some kind of medical anomaly.

I would think he was a total bastard.
What about if he turned into a Bull and carried away a female friend....

If there was indesputable evidence, then i'd still be an aetheist, i'm just far too arogant to admit defeat :( sucks cos it's driven away many friends.

I'd still be an Indo-European Neo-Pagan. Just because the Jewish God had enough power to resurrect his favourite prophet, doesn't mean I have to worship him. There are still better Gods out there.

What about if he turned into a Bull and carried away a female friend....


I would say he was horny total bastard.

*ba-dum chick*

OK, no flames please. Also, don't assume you know anything about my beliefs based on the question, to do so shows a lack of understanding that someone could just be curious (as I am). Finally, no "this is a dumbass question" replies - if you think that way, then just don't post, all I want are answers to the question, nothing more or less.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.
Since I have the utmost respect for Christians ( as well as those of other religions ) who truly understand their faith and do their very best to practice it, my attitudes/beliefs about Jesus of Nazereth would not change. :)

I can honestly say that my views of Christianity would not change. The validity of any religion hinges on the validity of what is taught, not on who's doing the teaching. Miracles and the like are not teachings as much as expedient means to encourage faith.

I might be wrong, but I have a feeling you'd much rather know how an atheist would react to proof of God (the Christian one). In my case, I'd start waging war on it, because in all honesty, I simply cannot percieve the Christian God to be anything other than pure evil. No offence intended.

None taken and no, I don't really wonder how an atheist would react to proof of the Christian God - Once there was proof of God, they would no longer be aetheists. I'm really just curious on how the "miracle" of resurrection, without anything else would affect the view on Christianity.

This question is fairly idiotic.

Let me ask you this, if Zeus came down from the heavens right now in his firey chariot and smote you with a bolt of lighting, what would you think?

I'd think "wow, I need to re-evaluate my ideas about Athena and Mars."

If Jesus genuinely had been resurrected, however it happened, it wouldn't change my beliefs on Christianity at all. I still wouldn't believe he was the son of (what I believe to be, at best, a fictional) God, nor would I believe he was the result of a virgin birth.

I am an agnostic, although I can only speak for myself. Personally, I do believe that Jesus existed and was a great teacher. If there was indisputable proof that he rose from the dead, I would still be agnostic. Whether Jesus rose from the dead or not does not change my beliefs about him or god. O, and next time don't use the term "non-christian." This is a stupid term and just shows your ignorance.

'Non-Christian' is not a stupid or ignorant term. It is just a way of saying 'someone who is not a christian'. Would you prefer it if everytime someone said 'non-christian' they instead gave a list of every single other belief structure (religious or otherwise)?

'Non-Christian' is not a stupid or ignorant term. It is just a way of saying 'someone who is not a christian'. Would you prefer it if everytime someone said 'non-christian' they instead gave a list of every single other belief structure (religious or otherwise)?

yes, so long as they included Jedi Knight :P

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?
My attitude/belief about Christianity would not change, as I would doubt the evidence. It is the first and only actual physical evidence of a miracle, and science being what it is, this evidence, however "irrefutable", is still open to being misinterpreted.

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.
As a non-literally interpreted religion, I do not buy into Christianity; the symbolism does not suit me. But I would buy it even less if it was literally real. If it was literally real, then the whole religion becomes a sham. So I must question the proof, because it is central to my beliefs. If Jesus as "Son of God" and miracles were literally true, my understanding of Christianity as a religion would collapse (i.e. it would no longer be a religion if it was literally true).

Is Jedi Knight a recognised religion in every country? I know it is in England, because I remember that enough people put it down as their religion in that census a few years back. I find it annoying, however, that so many aetheists just put down 'Church of England' despite not being Christians. Is that because they're ashamed of not having any beliefs or do they just not know how to spell Aetheist? In fact - do I even know how to spell Aetheist? Is it Aetheist or Atheist or what?

OK, no flames please. Also, don't assume you know anything about my beliefs based on the question, to do so shows a lack of understanding that someone could just be curious (as I am). Finally, no "this is a dumbass question" replies - if you think that way, then just don't post, all I want are answers to the question, nothing more or less.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.


That is beyond the realm of being able to prove (the rising part … you know the part that makes it divine) and can not be proved in this universe beyond a doubt. So your question is moot

If it was possible I would play along with the hypothetical

But your hypothetical is not possible

Is Jedi Knight a recognised religion in every country? I know it is in England, because I remember that enough people put it down as their religion in that census a few years back.

Urban myth, but a whole crapload of people did put down Jedi Knight, see here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_census_phenomenon)

Is Jedi Knight a recognised religion in every country? I know it is in England, because I remember that enough people put it down as their religion in that census a few years back. I find it annoying, however, that so many aetheists just put down 'Church of England' despite not being Christians. Is that because they're ashamed of not having any beliefs or do they just not know how to spell Aetheist? In fact - do I even know how to spell Aetheist? Is it Aetheist or Atheist or what?
Atheist

Assuming the impossbile happened, that proof of his death and resurrection existed, I'd convert to God's religion. The only way for there to be proof, would be for God to come down and show people, and then I'd convert to whatever religion God proclaimed.

FYI, it won't be Christianity.

Assuming the impossbile happened, that proof of his death and resurrection existed, I'd convert to God's religion. The only way for there to be proof, would be for God to come down and show people, and then I'd convert to whatever religion God proclaimed.

FYI, it won't be Christianity.
Yeah I somehow doubt an all powerful being would conform to the narrow point of view imposed by Christianity

hmm...
rising from the dead is no big deal really, my mother in law did, she was dead for 2 minutes.
however, the spirit of your question is "if there was irrefutable proof of god existing around the time of jesus, what would you do?"

i would say, "hmm, ok, so he was around then. as he has not reappeared or in any unquestionable way revealed himself since then, i have to assume he has left. As a greater technilogical power seems magical and humans are evolving, when we eventually catch up to wherever he/it is now, he better have some good freakin' answers to our questions or he'll get lit up like a christmas tree... because that's what humans do".

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.

OK, my answer is, there would be no change. Jesus probably did exist; he was a political rabble rouser, with a lineage that gave him royal aspirations, trying to rally the Jews, and he had some fairly good and forward thinking ideas. The ressurrection was a myth tagged on after the fact by supporters who knew deifying him would further their cause. It is, however, not impossible that he was crucified, pronounced dead, stuck in a cave and woke up later. No huge surprise there, considering the state of the medical establishment at the time.

I can't believe that no one has asked the obvious follow up...

Christians, if there was irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazareth was a myth, that he never actually existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

I'd never be satisfied with a "Oh, there's scientific proof of...". I'd need to now HOW it happened, and what was the mechanism that led to such ressurection, and I'd need to be able to reproduce that occurring. I'm afraid the magic words "scientific proof" won't be enough for most atheists or agnostics.

AND in the hypothetical case that was REALLY proved, it wouldn't change my ethics at all as I don't believe in christian values.

Would you instantly believe someone's values and ideas just because that person had made something really outstanding (like "ressurrection")??? Aren't the ideals more important than that?

It wouldn't change anything, you'd still need to prove that Jesus' 'rising from the dead' was caused by a divine power, specifically the Jewish god.

something not yet mentioned:

The ressurection of Jesus is not the only miracle claimed to be performed by God. there are a lot of other, non-proven miracles left to 'validate' (scientists still had to prove, for instance, Eden existed/exists... I'd personally like to know where it was/is :P ). And, if all of these miracles are proven too, it's still not sure that the christian 'God' did it. Maybe Zeus felt like ressurecting someone and picked him, knowing he would cause a whole new religion to be formed. Of which the followers were all not-knowingly worshipping him, while at the same time declaring him a 'false god'...

Conclusion: even if it was all proved, I'd still be an Atheist.

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived...

I thought that much already existed.

as crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed

That's actually one of the easier 'miracles' in the whole story to explain scientifically (although I do readily admit that proof is, and in all likelihood will forever be, unattainable - that is beside the point however, for the purposes I'll assume the theory around it to be true)

what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

I still wouldn't believe them - and I'd still reliegious nuts who seem to think they're better than the rest of us because they believe something we don't.

Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god"

That's the most important part - if that could be proved, I might have to rethink. But the major problem between me and any religion normally comes down to the basics of what allegedly happened (eg. miracles etc.) are generally plausable but highly improbable, whereas I refuse to take the idea that the most important points (eg. the existence of god(s) or sons thereof) should be taken as read based on proof of other events happening.

If proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.

Various happenings and events within the bible have been proved (to varying degrees of doubt) - I still don't believe you ;)

OK, no flames please. Also, don't assume you know anything about my beliefs based on the question, to do so shows a lack of understanding that someone could just be curious (as I am). Finally, no "this is a dumbass question" replies - if you think that way, then just don't post, all I want are answers to the question, nothing more or less.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.

Very interesting. As you say the concepts of God and the virgin birth aren't involved I wouldn't know what to think. I would keep an open mind as to whether the events were divine or whether there was another explanation. A bit brief I know but I hope its helpful. :)

3 days. The thing is, it would have been rather hard for him to have slipped into a coma - considering that he was flayed, crucified and gutted.

The thing is, it would have been rather hard for him to have slipped into a coma - considering that he was flayed, crucified and gutted.

I would think a coma would be just what he would have slipped into.

And by the way, he was not "gutted" as you put it.

If there was proof that this happened, I would just assume that he was cut down before he died, and someone nursed him back to health in 3 days time, then he came out of the cave (or whatever) and people just assumed God saved him. Because I think that would be a possible explination, just because he has raised form the dead does not mean he was dead, maybe he was near dead.

So in all reality I would not become a Christian.

I would see what the scientists agree on and believe that (yes I don’t like to ask too many questions)

My view would not change at all.

I don’t believe in miracles or the supernatural. Anything that really happens in the natural world is, by definition, real and natural. Therefore, if a man really did return from the dead after three days, then that is nothing more than a previously unrecorded natural phenomenon. It would neither add to nor detract from Christianity as a religion.

The thing is, it would have been rather hard for him to have slipped into a coma - considering that he was flayed, crucified and gutted.
You're thinking of that Scottish guy from the other Mel Gibson movie.

My life would be made worse. Instead of certain Christians pointing to a book with no basis in scientific fact and using it as an excuse to enact Theocratic laws, they'd point to a book with one basis in scientific fact and use it as an excuse to enact Theocratic laws. That one fact in their favor would sway a few people to their side, I'm sure.
Too frickin' right. :rolleyes:

I've basically had this attitude towards all religious threads lately:

You can't argue for or against something that cannot be proven or disproven. So why the hell is everyone fighting?

I can honestly say that my views of Christianity would not change. The validity of any religion hinges on the validity of what is taught, not on who's doing the teaching. Miracles and the like are not teachings as much as expedient means to encourage faith.
Quite.

I've basically had this attitude towards all religious threads lately:

You can't argue for or against something that cannot be proven or disproven. So why the hell is everyone fighting?
Sure you can. We do it all day long. ;)

We're fighting because we like to fight. If our arguments could proven for disproven, our fights might end someday, and then what would we do?

Sure you can. We do it all day long. ;)

We're fighting because we like to fight. If our arguments could proven for disproven, our fights might end someday, and then what would we do?

You would argue about something worthwhile like: Megan's Law, Gun Control, or Drilling in Alaska. You know, things that might actually END.

I'd buy in, but the only proof I'd accept was to seem him die personally verify it, and then see him comback myself ..I think Thomas was too easy to convince .


OK, no flames please. Also, don't assume you know anything about my beliefs based on the question, to do so shows a lack of understanding that someone could just be curious (as I am). Finally, no "this is a dumbass question" replies - if you think that way, then just don't post, all I want are answers to the question, nothing more or less.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.

You would argue about something worthwhile like: Megan's Law, Gun Control, or Drilling in Alaska. You know, things that might actually END.
You don't get it, do you? You just don't. ;)

Look, babe, the best lessons are taught by example. Instead of sitting around complaining about how all we ever do is sit around and complain -- go start a worthwhile thread. See what happens. Maybe it'll be good.

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?


It would be the same I have had for the last years: indiference.

This story happened in France, some years ago: A 90-years-old woman died and, 2 days later, while the vigil, she suddendly woke up and asked for water. Imagine the surprise. The woman lived 1 more year.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?


I'm quite sure that my attitude would not change one bit. Now, if you were able to prove all other religions/philosophies were all wrong, then I might consider becoming a practicing christian. however, since this hypothetical i'm 100% confident none of this will ever happen.

What would you do if aliens came down to earth and said that humanity was an experiment?

I would get up in the morning, serve breakfeast, go to work, come home, watch tv, have dinner, quality time with family, have sex and go to bed.


If someone managed to prove what the initial poster stated I would do the same, I control my life .. noone else does.

OK, no flames please. Also, don't assume you know anything about my beliefs based on the question, to do so shows a lack of understanding that someone could just be curious (as I am). Finally, no "this is a dumbass question" replies - if you think that way, then just don't post, all I want are answers to the question, nothing more or less.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.

The first two provisos don't mean anything. Jesus could very well have lived and been crucified (indeed, I think both are true). It's the third one that really poses the question.

If irrefutable proof existed that Jesus rose from the dead (though I can't conceive of what that proof might be) my first impression would be to think he wasn't dead in the first place. If, however, by your question you mean that there was proof he was clinically, irrevocably dead and then resurrected that would really be interesting.

I have to admit, though, that knowing such a thing is possible would only make me want to find out how to do it myself, it would not convince me that Jesus was the son of the Christian god. I firmly believe that Jesus was a mortal man and anything he could do any of could do if we were enlightened enough.

Well, you can be declared legally dead and still come back to life. Maybe he took a potion such as the one given to Juliet by Friar Lawrence in Romeo & Juliet, awakening after the effects wear off. He may have used one of his followers as a fraud to die on the cross. Jesus my have even been taken down before he died.

Even if he was truly resurrected, I wouldn't change my views, which are agnostic. My life is fine without the belief in some higher power, and unless there was some earthly benefit for me (such as immeasurable wealth, influence, knowledge) I wouldn't have any reason to proclaim loyalty. Heaven? Sounds great, but I don't see any proof that it exists, and I have no reason to trust someone to take me there if it actually did. Sure, there's a possibility that I could go to hell if God exists, but there's also a possibility that I could get hit by a bus driving home one day. Do I vow to never ride in a car again? No. Do I pledge my obedience to His will? No.

Anyway, even if I did decide to follow a religion, there are 19 major world religions which are subdivided into a total of 270 large religious groups, and many smaller ones. 34,000 separate Christian groups have been identified in the world. My chance of following the right path isn't looking too good now, is it? Didn't think so. I'll choose to spend my time doing something more productive and fun, where I know there'll be rewards involved. When Death comes knocking at my door, so be it. He'll still find an agnostic, just as he would if I signed out today.

Beat a dead horse, theists. Beat it good.

I don't think so.

What scientific proof would there be exactly? I mean, short of developing a time machine and going back in time and seeking this guy out and videotaping the whole event... but then that's assuming that the names/places/times are accurate in the bible.

I dunno, this just seems like a really stupid question.

Well, I decided a while ago that arguing for my beliefs on these forums (Christian beliefs incidentally) is frankly pointless, since any evidence and arguments I offer won't affect the atheists/agnostics we seem to get on here - I haven't seen a single poster in any of our lovely little religious discussion threads say 'hmm, these are convincing arguments, I think I'll at least reconsider some of my atheistic beliefs', even if their arguments have been completely shredded... I digress.

My point is that despite this I still get that twitching in my fingers when I see blatant stupidity being spoken, and I couldn't resist it this time. Now this isn't a flame, and I'm not saying any of you are stupid - being simply misinformed, or inadequetly informed isn't stupidity - but I'd like to say this to all those people who keep insisting that Jesus could've been alive in the tomb, and could've been smuggled out etc.

First - the guy had just been nailed to a cross for hours, and prior to that had just had the shit beaten out of him (flogging). Do you really think that anyone in that state could have the strength to go through with some ridiculously complex plot to fake his own death? And why do you think that any of his followers would do it for him? His most dedicated follower - Simon Peter - vociferously denied even knowing Jesus for fear of what might happen to him.

So you say he could've still been alive when he was cut down - no he couldn't. Someone said he was gouged - well he was. A Roman legionary thrust a spear into his side before they cut him down, and blood and water flowed out. Now the blood seperates into blood and water after you've been dead for some time, so he couldn't have still been alive.

Then you say he could've been smuggled out of the cave by his disciples. Well it was a cave, with a massive frickin boulder over the entrance, and a seal (basically mortared up) on that, with guards outside - and these were Roman legionaries, the finest troops in the world. They wouldn't have dorpped off to sleep, or run away from a couple of women, or a few guys with swords. Also, how the hell could Jesus have survived alone in the cave with no food, no water, and having been crucified, flogged and stabbed?

Anyway, as I said, there's no point in me discussing this, and there was no point to this argument here. I just wanted to set a few facts straight.


p.s. Oh and to all of you who keep saying 'how could there be evidence? You'd need to go back, this is impossible' and so on - that's why its hypothetical! That's what hypothetical means! You assume something, then try to reason out the effects that something would have on the world. Come on people - its a hypothetical question, so stop trying to reason your way out of stuff.

Incidentally there was even less point and still less coerence to that second rant, and I'm fully aware of it. Frankly I can't be bothered to sort it out, because it wouldn't make any difference anyway.

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

id think about it, evaluate the evidence, consider whether or not ressurection is the same as being god (after all, lazarus rose from the dead and he wasnt god) run it around in my head then make a decision.

it would almost certainly take more than the proof of ressurrection to make me a believer.

Well, based on the terms of the question, since one of the central beliefs of Christianity was proven to be absolutely true, then I'd re-evaluate Christianity. However, I don't know that I'd convert. Raising from the dead still doesn't prove "Son of God." Maybe he was son of Allah, or son of Buddha or son of satan, or God himself, or a genetic freak, etc. It also fails to prove the other supposed miracles such as the virgin birth or water to wine stuff. Proof that one facet of the belief system of Christianity has an actual, factual basis does not serve to prove Christianity as a whole. Just like proof that alcohol has addictive properties doesn't prove that everyone who drinks is an alcoholic.

Let me ask you this, if Zeus came down from the heavens right now in his firey chariot and smote you with a bolt of lighting, what would you think?
Nothing. Dead people aren't too good with that whole 'thinking' biz.

I don't doubt the existance of a man who would one day be known as Jesus Christ, he was probably a great religious figure of his time, advocating goodwill toward others. What I am skeptic about is the whole idea of Christianity which came into being hundreds of years after the death of this figure.

For those of you who have considered the question seriously, thanks for your input. It's interesting to read what you'd do/think.

For those who have not answered the question, but have instead called the question stupid or concerned themselves with the issue of what form the proof would take - do yourselves a favor and learn to read - The very first post said NOT to do this - if you're not going to answer the question, then just don't post. As has been said here:
p.s. Oh and to all of you who keep saying 'how could there be evidence? You'd need to go back, this is impossible' and so on - that's why its hypothetical! That's what hypothetical means! You assume something, then try to reason out the effects that something would have on the world. Come on people - its a hypothetical question, so stop trying to reason your way out of stuff.

Finally, for those of you who seem to think that by posting this question I'm trying to get you to somehow admit you would become a christian or that I think you would be forced to admit the truth of Christianity or the existence of God or some other such thing - you're hallucinating. The question was asked because I was curious to see what the reactions of non-christians would be to proof that a central tenet of Christianity was factually true, that is all. I'm just satisfying my own sense of curiosity, that's it. So, accept it as an interesting hypothetical and let us know how you'd react.

I don't doubt the existance of a man who would one day be known as Jesus Christ, he was probably a great religious figure of his time, advocating goodwill toward others. What I am skeptic about is the whole idea of Christianity which came into being hundreds of years after the death of this figure. Even if I didn't believe him to be the Son of God… and I'm rational enough to admit that that belief may have to do with my culture… I'd still think that there was definitely something special about him. Out of the blue, against all his upbringing, he challenged all the ideas around him, seemingly without any prompting - he was very religious, yet went against what was considered absolute truth.
Touched, in one way or another - by some form of madness or God.

IM0.

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?


I wouldn't care. If there is a God, I don't care about him or her. They have no right to tell me what to do and would still resent the way non-christians are treated by christians. The only change I might feel is an increased resentment of God for beleiving it has the right to control me or judge me on its princaples. Nevertheless, if this was shown to be true, I would still be of the belief that God will judge me on my own grounds and morals or none at all. If God sent me to hell for being myself, then I would be glad to be rid of the curse of God's presence.

OK, no flames please. Also, don't assume you know anything about my beliefs based on the question, to do so shows a lack of understanding that someone could just be curious (as I am). Finally, no "this is a dumbass question" replies - if you think that way, then just don't post, all I want are answers to the question, nothing more or less.

OK, the Question (remember it is purely hypothetical):

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.
If the above-mentioned proof were provided, I would conclude that humanity is being targetted by a hideous celestial tyrant, and that we should immediately band together to overthrow this "God" being.

For those of you who have considered the question seriously, thanks for your input. It's interesting to read what you'd do/think.

For those who have not answered the question, but have instead called the question stupid or concerned themselves with the issue of what form the proof would take - do yourselves a favor and learn to read - The very first post said NOT to do this - if you're not going to answer the question, then just don't post. As has been said here:

Do yourself a favour and learn from the arguments given.

Your question could not be answered as I think you wish it could have been. Partly because your hypothetical question didn't contain enough details and/or definitions to allow it to be judged.


Finally, for those of you who seem to think that by posting this question I'm trying to get you to somehow admit you would become a christian or that I think you would be forced to admit the truth of Christianity or the existence of God or some other such thing - you're hallucinating. The question was asked because I was curious to see what the reactions of non-christians would be to proof that a central tenet of Christianity was factually true, that is all. I'm just satisfying my own sense of curiosity, that's it. So, accept it as an interesting hypothetical and let us know how you'd react.

Problem is: if he did exist, and if he was killed and there was scientific proof that he was dead, then he could not come back to life - that would be an impossibility.

I find it interesting that people would continue to deny something supernatural even if they saw it themselves. This does not seem like you are searching for the truth any longer. Rather, it appears you are simply sticking to your guns and ignoring the truth. Is this any way to treat religion, by simply sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring anything that might disagree with your beliefs? Christian, Buddhist, Atheist, what have you, you should all be searching for the truth, not simply searching to prove yourself right.
- Pete
Street Vendor, Tyslan

Christians, if there was irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazareth was a myth, that he never actually existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

If that could truely be proven, then I would probably become Jewish.

I am actually quite shocked by this thread. The Bible says numerous times that God doesn't show us more signs because it wouldn't convince anyone. I've always been doubtful of this claim, but apparently its true. I'm not sure what to say, I guess no matter how much evidence there is for (or against) something people just believe whatever they perfer to believe.

Do yourself a favour and learn from the arguments given.

Your question could not be answered as I think you wish it could have been. Partly because your hypothetical question didn't contain enough details and/or definitions to allow it to be judged.



Problem is: if he did exist, and if he was killed and there was scientific proof that he was dead, then he could not come back to life - that would be an impossibility.

I see this all the time. Some people just don't seem to like and/or understand hypothetical questions.

I'm not trying to put words in the mouth of the poster, but I think you are missing the point of what the poster is getting at. What I think he really wants to know is if there was strong evidence in favor of Christianity would that change your mind about it. As part of the hypothetical you are to assume that you found this evidence convincing. Now the question is what would you do with such evidence. I sort of took it as a given that this would change one's mind about Christianity, but others have said that even if God himself came down in all His glory and said this is the truth they wouldn't believe.

Saying that resurection is impossible first assumes a lot. For this hypothetical assume that resurection is possible.

I find it interesting that people would continue to deny something supernatural even if they saw it themselves. This does not seem like you are searching for the truth any longer. Rather, it appears you are simply sticking to your guns and ignoring the truth. Is this any way to treat religion, by simply sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring anything that might disagree with your beliefs? Christian, Buddhist, Atheist, what have you, you should all be searching for the truth, not simply searching to prove yourself right.
- Pete
Street Vendor, Tyslan

1. A man who was thought to be dead is found to be alive.
2.(a)He was alive (or in a coma, whatever) all along and is still alive by some quirk of chance.
(b)He was dead and has now returned from the dead.
3. If 2(a) is true then no further explanation is needed.
4. As far as we know, the dead cannot be ressurected by natural means.
5. Ergo, if 2(b) is true then he was ressurected by 'supernatural' means.
6. If 5 is the case then we cannot explain how he was revived and we must accept that we can't explain how it happened.
7. However, this means that while it could be the work of an all-powerful being (God) it could equally well be the result of another force.
8. If there is a God it would be reasonable to assume that it was His work.
9. If there isn't a God then it can't have been His work.
10. Ergo, the point hinges on proving the existence of God, which cannot be proved either way.
11. Attempting to prove the existence of God through the ressurection would probably turn into a circular argument.

I've only just started my Critical Thinking course so if I've made any mistakes could someone tell me? Thanks.

P.S. I suspect you're going to be flamed by people saying that science disproves God, and, that by relying on faith you are:
simply sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring anything that might disagree with your beliefs

I find it interesting that people would continue to deny something supernatural even if they saw it themselves. This does not seem like you are searching for the truth any longer. Rather, it appears you are simply sticking to your guns and ignoring the truth. Is this any way to treat religion, by simply sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring anything that might disagree with your beliefs? Christian, Buddhist, Atheist, what have you, you should all be searching for the truth, not simply searching to prove yourself right.
- Pete
Street Vendor, Tyslan
All that is real is contained within the realm of the natural, so opening my mind to the possibility of supernatural causes of natural things is non-sense, not truth.

i'd need more proof

and for scientific tests to be possible (for example if every time you crucified jeus he rose from the grave then maybe but you would need lots of jeuses and a sample group of ones that wern't the son of god (apparently))

also one thing isn't enough

so much proof needed

I find it interesting that people would continue to deny something supernatural even if they saw it themselves. This does not seem like you are searching for the truth any longer. Rather, it appears you are simply sticking to your guns and ignoring the truth. Is this any way to treat religion, by simply sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring anything that might disagree with your beliefs? Christian, Buddhist, Atheist, what have you, you should all be searching for the truth, not simply searching to prove yourself right.
- Pete
Street Vendor, Tyslan

supernatural
n adjective
1 (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.
2 exceptionally or extraordinarily great.
n noun (the supernatural) supernatural manifestations or events.

If I see something it is the work of nature and I can rely on science to explain it in time (if not right away).

Religion has been shown to hold no "truths".

I see this all the time. Some people just don't seem to like and/or understand hypothetical questions.

I'm not trying to put words in the mouth of the poster, but I think you are missing the point of what the poster is getting at. What I think he really wants to know is if there was strong evidence in favor of Christianity would that change your mind about it. As part of the hypothetical you are to assume that you found this evidence convincing. Now the question is what would you do with such evidence. I sort of took it as a given that this would change one's mind about Christianity, but others have said that even if God himself came down in all His glory and said this is the truth they wouldn't believe.

Saying that resurection is impossible first assumes a lot. For this hypothetical assume that resurection is possible.

But his "hypothetical" asks that people accept something that is impossible.

And if someone turned up saying they were god then I would believe he was after something.

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?
I see this all the time. Some people just don't seem to like and/or understand hypothetical questions.

I'm not trying to put words in the mouth of the poster, but I think you are missing the point of what the poster is getting at. What I think he really wants to know is if there was strong evidence in favor of Christianity would that change your mind about it.
Ah, but now, see... worded like that the hypothetical question is answerable. The impossible "irrefutable proof" has now become "strong evidence," the request to describe an "attitude/belief" has now become a simple "change of mind, yes or no." This question is easily answered without tredding on the beliefs of those replying.

As part of the hypothetical you are to assume that you found this evidence convincing. Now the question is what would you do with such evidence. I sort of took it as a given that this would change one's mind about Christianity, but others have said that even if God himself came down in all His glory and said this is the truth they wouldn't believe.

Saying that resurection is impossible first assumes a lot. For this hypothetical assume that resurection is possible.
Especially if God came down in all his glory and said he stated The Truth, I would not believe. "What does God need with a starship?" Religion is not about the god, it's about the human individual fitting himself into the universe. Proof of god is irrelevant to any religion, so it does not change the context of belief one iota.

Convincing evidence that Jesus' ressurection really happened is another matter. It would not prove Heaven and Hell, life after death or God, only that Jesus returned from the dead. I don't see as it would change how the atheist views the religion at all. I for one would not be flocking to convert.

But his "hypothetical" asks that people accept something that is impossible.

And if someone turned up saying they were god then I would believe he was after something.

That is the whole friggin' point of a hypothetical - assume something, even something impossible. It's really not that hard to do if you give it a shot. Imagine (I'm assuming that as a human being you have the ability to imagine something that is not real); surely as a child you imagined dragons, fairies, elves, santa clause, Hobbits, something - do it again! - Imagine a man coming back to life and then honestly state how that would affect you! It's not that f'ing hard - a decent number of people who have responded here have been able to do so, surely they don't possess an ability that you lack do they?

If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?

Don't argue about what form that proof would take, that is just dodging the question - just assume it exists in whatever form. Also, note, I do not ask you to assume he is the "son of god" or the product of a virgin birth. I just asked what you would think about christianity if proof of a basic tennent of that religion (the death and resurrection of Jesus) existed.

If Jesus rose from the dead, but was not the son of God, then it opens up the possibility that Jesus could be a messenger of Satan in disguise, an alien, a zombie, a satanic alien zombie, etc. I think I'd be more intrigued by the ability to ressurect than anything else.

That is the whole friggin' point of a hypothetical - assume something, even something impossible. It's really not that hard to do if you give it a shot. Imagine (I'm assuming that as a human being you have the ability to imagine something that is not real); surely as a child you imagined dragons, fairies, elves, santa clause, Hobbits, something - do it again! - Imagine a man coming back to life and then honestly state how that would affect you! It's not that f'ing hard - a decent number of people who have responded here have been able to do so, surely they don't possess an ability that you lack do they?

No. You cannot pose a hypothetical based on an impossible - that just dosen't work.

And yes, as a child I even believed in mythical things like dragons, fairies, elves, santa, hobbits and even god. But then I grew up.

So, as it is impossible for a man to come back to life in the way the question demanded we accept. It is impossible to entertain the notion that there would be scientific proof for his reserrection, it is impossible to answer the question as posed.

I find "Christian" to be a tricky title in terms of this kind of conversation... A person who follows the teachings of a given political thinker might be termed a Marxist, Maoist, Hobbesian, Jeffersonian, etc... And in that sense, I guess I'm at least a little "Christian" in that I believe he lived, was an ahead-of-his-time theological & political thinker, etc... but I'm not "Christian".

To answer your direct question in a way you migh tnot approve of, it's very difficult for me to realistically imagine that kind of proof coming forward without the advent of reliable, repeatable time travel, but I understand that's not the issue.

so...
If irrefutable, scientific proof that Jesus of Nazereth lived, was crucified and then physically rose from the dead on the third day existed, what would your attitude/belief about Christianity be?
Not much different, probably... The entire tradition of holding a wake comes from the fact that from that time to almost two thousand years later, it was fairly easy to mistake someone for dead, only to have them "wake up" later.

If your "proof" includes proof that he was really, medically stone dead...? Well, that would be something. I'd become much more agnostic and much less atheistic, perhaps, but it would not alter my relationship with established, organized religion in any way.

I simply can't believe that a god/dess would create me the way I am, then turn around and punish me for being that way... And if it turns out s/he would, I don't want to worship her... Hell, I don't even want to know her.

No. You cannot pose a hypothetical based on an impossible - that just dosen't work.
Absolute nonsense. Of course you can. Observe:

Hypothetically speaking, if you could exist in hard vacuum for a limitless amount of time without aging and propel yourself at 1/10th the speed of light by force of will alone, would you spend what might seem an eternity exploring space in nothing but hiking clothes?

There... See? I just did it. All it requires is the acceptance that something that is, at this time, accepted as "impossible" might become at some future conditional time or situation possible, thus allowing the formulation of a rational hypothesis that at the current time seems irrational.

To answer the question, there was a program on channel 4 the other week about people who had been (or nearly) buried alive. It happens sometimes. Nothing mystical about it.
Personally I believe Jesus did exist, and was a thoroughly nice and decent bloke, although somewhat egotistical. But that should be the end of the story, nice bloke, good idea's, big mouth, gets into trouble.
I don't believe he was 'resurrected' or rather entombed alive, the bible on that bit is so vague it's laughable.